Chassis 1C/10S Updated Information

Hi Michael
Are these what you are looking for?
http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=137514277&postcount=197
http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=137511433&postcount=161
http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=137433417&postcount=134
Nathan

 

Thanks Nathan.
Forgot that 10S had been handled in THIS thread, was convinced that there was a separate one (besides this).

 

Whats up with Bill's "1C 2C"??

Keep an eye out for any of these. Especially ones not made by Stan in the 60ies and yes you can tell the difference...
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Those are bolts. It would also be interesting to see if there is another color under the black paint on the chassis.

 

I checked again the old thread (http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16284) on frame details. The most important information is this photo:
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Bended - obviously round-shaped - tubes, which are welded together in the center by using stiffening triangular-shaped pieces (sorry, but my technical English is not the best...). The central cross member is made from plate steel bars, and looks not original.

Jim various times wrote that acc. to his opinion this frame layout is exactly the same as can be seen on the original drawing from 1946. IMHO this is not the case, as can be seen below.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

But the layout shown on the drawing is identical with the frame of a car which for 95 % I believe is 003S (with the remaining 5 % count for 001S). See photo below (the full photo has been posted already earlier in this thread).

Whereas the X of 10S is bended, this one is fishmouth-welded into a center brace which looks like having the same (oval shaped) tube size than the X itself.
.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

The bended tubes forming the center X AFAIK had been used only for the Spyder Corsas, see photos below.
With the exception of the stiffening transverse, which as I believe is not original anyway.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Sorry for using separate postings, but the system on this board does not allow to insert images into the text. So this is the only way to keep my explanations logical and understandable.

Please give me another 30 minutes or so for finishing....

 

When Colombo returned to Ferrari in early 1948 he changed the chassis / frame layout completely. The X section was substituted by a bolt-in center brace, and the frame was now underslung at the rear axle.

This layout was first used for the SWB (2250 mm) Spyder Corsas, and then also for the 166 MM (2200 mm).
.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

The underslung layout was then also used for the road cars, although I'm not sure whether already the very early ones (005S etc.) had it already. My knowledge about the road cars is very limited.
.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Contrary to the competition cars (166 SC SWB & 166 MM) the road cars had still the center X section with stiffening transverse as used already for 001S/003S. Photo below I believe shows 005S.
.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Photo below shows 01C/010I when at Bill's workshop at La Jolla in the 90's (taken by John Starkey).
The X section is different than at the other LWB Spyder Corsas, no bended tubes, but fishmouth-welded onto a piece of flat steel. At least this is my interpretation of the picture. Bill may know better surely. It looks like the version used for 001S/003S but without the stiffening transverse tube.
.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

All this to my best knowledge, if somebody has different information - please correct me.

The bended X section tubes as used for 10S AFAIK had been used exclusively for the LWB Spyder Corsas. They are proven for 002, 004C, 012I, and 016I. 008I and 014I had been SWB's with the different layout as shown above, 010I fishmouth welds, and 006I AFAIK disappeared.

I believe based on this we can exclude that 10S may be 001S or 003S.

 

That flat steel piece at the center of the X, rather than a rounded tube, is one of the things that concerns me. Why have we never seen this in a period photo?

 

Interesting to compare this info with the pix I posted earlier (in old photos, I think) of 024MB. 024 is underslung, has the rear shock towers of the "Colombo" chassis shown, but has an "X" cross-member. Sorry if this is too off-topic.

 

It's not off-topic at all, at least not for me. That would mean that not all 166MM had the frame layout as per picture in #255. Question: why is the serial 024MB and not 0024M?

 

Possibly because there is none?

 

Michael,

Thank you for addressing, in detail, a concern I raised in post 258 of the other thread: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16284&page=13

By the way, considering both threads address the same topic and, for the most part, this one is a continuation of the previous thread: Should we merge the two threads?

Regards,

Art S.

 

You mean this one?

Which 1947 picture do you mean?

 

Michael good posts and thoughts.

I agree that the flat stock looks non original.

Something else may have been there originally but who knows.

I also think the 10S stamping as it's on the chassis means a lot more than the 1C as those stampings are on removable pieces.

It will be VERY interesting to see what stamping is on the chassis where 002 is stamped.

Is this chassis under slung or like 002's in the rear?

The WB is same as 002's correct??

Best

 

There's my photo again, glad it turned out reasonably well and thanks to the people here I knew where the important parts were.

 

As a fan of vintage Ferraris, I read all this and am amazed. I cannot stop reading and I my work suffers because of that!!!

Mr Müller, you have incredible knowledge of the early Ferraris... Maybe you can give me some insights on the 166MM thread I started...